To ask what you think is fair in this situation?

[Spookytoast]

Person A manages 3 people (B, C, and D).

Person B was on long term sick due to stress, but has been back in the office for almost a year, with reasonable adjustments made for their condition. Before going on sick leave B was underperforming and was subject to performance improvement measures.

Persons B, C and D are all contracted to do the same job at the same level.

Since returning to work, Person B hasn’t been working at the level they are paid for, partly due to them underperforming at a the Lower level work (which was supposed to be just to ease B back in).

There is a new upcoming project which person A must decide who to put in charge of. B and C both really want the project. B really needs to start performing at the higher level again in order come off the performance management scheme but A isn’t sure B will be able to cope with the work. B really wants the project to prove that they are still able to work at that level and have felt demotivated working at the lower level, hence the underperforming. C has worked extremely hard this year to prove themselves and A would feel bad overlooking C for this opportunity when they are more than capable.

However A is under a lot of pressure from B and HR to give the project to B so they aren’t disadvantaged when it comes to performance reviews. A is also worried about discriminating against B due to her condition.

What would you say is fair in this situation, and what advice would you give to A, B and C?

From a business point of view you need the project completing on time to the highest standard possible, by a reliable member of staff you know you can count on, so C is your obvious candidate. Giving the job to B sounds far too risky for the business, as well as being unfair to C.

I think OP must be B!

I thought OP was A!

B is taking the piss, blaming the underperforming on being demotivated. If you’re demotivated, then motivate yourself to do better so you can move off the boring work. B is not taking responsibility for their underperformance. For the project A needs someone who will take responsibility and who has proved themselves. That person sounds like C to me.

I'd give it to c.

Not just becayse I was concerned about b and their stress, their previous poor performance before going off with stress, but their poor performance at rhe lower grade work because they find it demotivatiinal. You don't get to pick and chose what you'll perform at and decide you won't if you think is something is beneath you.

That's not on. C has proven themselves, give it to c, they should not have to lose out due to the problem that is b.

I think the op is a too.

B has had 'reasonable adjustments' made for her due to stress. She is still demonstrating that she is finding it hard and is not currently able to work at an acceptable level. You have a duty of care to her and can't reasonably give her a higher level of work, potentially creating more pressure/stress for her. That's what I would say to her and HR and give the work to C who has proved herself.

If B has issues managing stress, then how are they going to cope with the added challenge of this new project?
Give it to C.

Definitely C, if u give it to B it will show C that hard work gets U nowhere.

If B is not managing low level work how is she gonna cope.

I'd also assume c had to pick up some of the slack from b. It's really not fair to penalise them further. You had a duty of care to both employees.

B should move back up to higher level work and take some off c when c takes over the new project.

You don't want to demoralise c also.

Did B come back and do well at the lower level then become demotivated because higher level work was not resumed? Or not been performing well at the lower level at all. Was there a deadline when she came back - do one month at the lower level, and if that is ok we'll pass back some stuff or has she just been left to drift on the lower level for nearly a year? That is pretty demotivating.

Surely she needs to do a solid month minimum at the lower level to a good standard to show she can do it with the promise of some higher level work after that as the motivation.

It's not really fair on C not to give it to them if they are the best person for the job.

I also really want to know what D is thinking about this...

tbf, stress isn't necessarily about high level work or limited to it.

I also really want to know what D is thinking about this...

Good point. The fairest thing would be to give D the job she doesn't want. then everyone is equally unhappy!

Sorry, B needs to prove that they can perform well at the normal level before being given any kind of project. And given that C will be busy with the project, it's the perfect opportunity for B to take over some of C's workload and prove they can work at the required level.

I'm interested to know D's thoughts. Are they shirking the burden by not stepping forwards? Should they perhaps be challenged?

C!!! No way b.

Attempt at addressing all the points in the comments.

• Some of the work that C and D used to do has been passed on to B since their return but it’s more ad hoc tasks rather than managing actual projects. B has a small mini project which was originally C’s before B’s return which C handed over but being honest B hasn’t managed it particularly well and C has ended up helping quite a lot. That is the trouble with giving B more responsibility.
• B is getting plenty of support in that they are allowed very flexible working, priority on training courses etc but the latest complaint is that the quality of the work they have been allocated isn’t challenging enough to make them stand out at performance review time. Quality of objectives is just as important as how people perform against them so if someone has an ‘easier objective’ they probably won’t be graded as high, which has a knock in effect on bonuses etc.
• D is the most experienced member of the team and has quite a wide portfolio of big projects anyway so has said they would like C to get this one (Younger and newest)
• A did consider B and C starting the project together but thinks this would just piss off B and C in equal measure!
• Re B’s performance improvement plan - they were placed on it at the end of the 2016 reporting year, but then went on sick leave for the best part of 2017 so had to be rolled into 2018 too (lasts for a year)
• Their improvement plan was followed but unfortunately B never demonstrated an ability to work at the higher level, the opposite in fact. Lots of meetings, lots of extensions of reasonable adjustments, attempts at allocating different bits of work but difficult without treading on C and Ds toes.
• A does have a manager who feels equally as torn about the situation.

B needs to be managed more closely and needs to be given more updates with HR and someone representing B present also.

If B is so oblivious to his/her underperformance, that they think they're capable of completing this project, then stress isn't the only problem.

It should be a choice between C and D.

A should leave B out of it. A should take B to one side and, in front of official witnesses, explain why they aren't being considered.

I'm not clear why A and A's manager are 'torn'. It seems clear that B's performance plan needs sharpening up, and that C has earned the opportunity. To not give it to C could be seen as discriminatory.
How much longer is B's performance plan expected to last? What outcomes have been set and when are they due to be reviewed? Will B continue to be on performance management for the foreseeable?
I have sympathy with B. But the organisation doesn't seem to be addressing her difficulties very constructively.

B has a small mini project which was originally C’s before B’s return which C handed over but being honest B hasn’t managed it particularly well and C has ended up helping quite a lot. That is the trouble with giving B more responsibility.

and

Their improvement plan was followed but unfortunately B never demonstrated an ability to work at the higher level, the opposite in fact. Lots of meetings, lots of extensions of reasonable adjustments, attempts at allocating different bits of work but difficult without treading on C and Ds toes.

Strongly suggest that B isn't up to managing the new project!

A needs to sit down with their manager and draw up a list of the skills, targets and competencies the new project requires. Once they have that, they can look at whether B has demonstrated enough of them since returning to give a reasonable belief that they can accomplish the task. A decision can be made from there.

I'm not clear why A and A's manager are 'torn'.

HR have stuck their oar in! The obvious decision has become more tricky because the managers are stuck between 'best for business', versus the knowledge that HR will likely be unsupportive. Dealing with any possibility of discrimination can be like walking a tightrope, that's why it's essential that A and their manager can justify their final decision to the nth degree.

A and her manager need to get a grip and do some managing. Give the project to C - C has proved that they can do it, and will do a good job. Tell B that they are not getting the job because since they have returned to work they have done nothing to prove their worth - specifically as they are underperforming at a lower grade. If they had gripped the lower grade work and had done a good job, they would be in with a chance, but as they haven't, they can't be rewarded for poor performance. A can tell B that if their performance improves, they will certainly be considered for the next interesting piece of work.

A has been more than helpful to B, but she hasn't fulfilled her part of the bargain. You're not a charity giving gentle employment to the stressed, and underperformance and absence impact on others in the team. If you give her the project and she gets stressed and goes off sick again, you will be back to square one.

I feel A's pain. I am currently "managing out" someone who has had stress absence and poor performance for years. The impact on the team has been huge - we have been unable to get anyone in to cover, so everyone has been doing more work and having more stress themselves. Once we made the decision to get rid, it was like having a huge weight lift from our shoulders.

B has done nothing to prove themselves capable and the last thing you want to do is to hand something important to someone who you are not sure of but don’t want to upset.

The project needs to go to C who has worked hard to develop themselves this year, and not B who despite reasonable adjustments appears to not want to take responsibility for their performance.

Reasonable adjustments don’t mean everyone tiptoes around them to ensure they aren’t inconvenienced with having to do a good job. And I would argue as well that stress is something that there are plenty of things within B’s control that they could do to lessen the effects.

There does come a point when both B, HR and B’s manager A might need to consider that B just isn’t suited to this role.

I would allocate to C. The situation of B is unfortunate, business comes first business relations.